Template revised September 22, 2016.
COMMISSION
AGENDA MEMORANDUM
Item No.
6d_Attach_A
ACTION ITEM
Date of Meeting
November 14, 2017
DATE: November 7, 2017
Attachment A
SUBJECT: Replacement of Shilshole Bay Marina Restrooms with Multi-use Customer Service
Facilities (CIP #C800356)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Shilshole Bay Marina Restroom project will replace the old, worn restrooms with larger,
more efficient and Multi-use Customer Service Facilities that incorporate sustainable design
elements. Adding the new customer service buildings will help maintain Shilshole’s current
occupancy rate and improve the level of service expected at this otherwise first-class Port
facility.
JUSTIFICATION
The existing restroom and shower facilities at Shilshole Bay Marina (SBM) were built in 1961 as
part of the original marina construction and are at the end of their service life. Evidence of this
includes:
• Plumbing and electrical services are failing.
• Ventilation and floor drainage are inadequate.
• Florescent lights do not meet electric codes.
• Electric wall heaters are inefficient and failing.
• Buildings do not meet current energy codes.
• Finishes and tile grout are heavily deteriorated.
In addition, the existing facilities do not meet current ADA standards for showers, doorways,
sinks, mirrors, or water fountains.
As a result, maintenance requirements continue to increase while repairs are constrained by
the presence of lead paint and asbestos which require hazardous materials abatement. In
addition, customers and visitors are negatively impacted since restrooms are closed for
frequent repairs. The five, fifty-year-old restrooms were slated for replacement during the
2006-2008 Shilshole Improvements Project. The restrooms were removed from the plan due to
higher-than-anticipated overall project cost.
In their current condition, Shilshole’s restrooms do not adequately meet the needs of moorage
tenants, commercial customers and marina visitors, who expect suitable and accessible
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6d_Attach_A Page 2 of 6
Meeting Date: November 14, 2017
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
facilities. In fact, deteriorated restrooms put SBM at a competitive disadvantage when
compared to other local marinas at a time when the local marina industry anticipates a
downturn in boating as baby boomers age out of the pastime. To combat this trend, a long
term strategy to create a destination marina with amenities and value for the customer has
been pursued by the Port.
Currently, Shilshole Bay Marina is the largest marina in Seattle with more than 1,400 moorage
slips and an occupancy rate of approximately 94 percent. Moorage is primarily long-term
recreational moorage, with an additional 8,000 guest moorage visitors annually. SBM also
serves commercial fishing vessels, tribal vessel owners, and a thriving small cruise line, along
with the maritime businesses that support them. Vessels range from small kayaks to mega-
yachts; however, sailboats fill about 80 percent of the slips.
From the Port of Seattle’s 2013 Economic Impact Study, the Port’s recreational boating marinas
generated 323 jobs, almost $7.5 million in local purchases; $21.6 million in business revenues
and $1.8 million in state and local taxes, the majority of which is from Shilshole Bay Marina,
which generates gross income of $9.4 million annually.
DETAILS
Project Objectives
Replace the current restroom facilities at SBM with new customer services buildings that
include restrooms, showers, laundry facilities, and other tenant-use improvements to provide a
level of service above what is currently provided. Incorporate the feedback received from
moorage and business tenants during the individual and public outreach meetings to provide
the best user experience possible.
Scope of Work
The project consists of the construction of three new buildings. Two large, multi-use buildings
(restroom, shower and laundry) will be located in the south and central areas of the marina,
plus a smaller restroom/shower only building at the north end of the facility. As part of the
project, two of the older restroom structures would be repurposed for storage (M2 and M5)
and two will be demolished ((M4 and M6).
The South and Central buildings would have a footprint of approximately 2,800 square feet and
include separate ADA accessible men’s and women’s restrooms with toilet, sink and shower
areas, along with two family unisex restrooms with shower facilities and will also be ADA
accessible. These larger buildings also incorporate tenant laundry areas larger than the existing
facilities, with room for further expansion as needed.
The North building would be approximately 800 square feet and include six individual unisex
restroom and shower facilities (three each). Although consolidated into fewer buildings, the
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6d_Attach_A Page 3 of 6
Meeting Date: November 14, 2017
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
new facilities will significantly increase the number of showers over the existing configuration,
and more than double the current laundry capacity, both top priorities in outreach feedback.
Sustainability
The design incorporates sustainable features including radiant heated floors, water saving
fixtures, onsite stormwater management bioswales and rooftop photovoltaic panel arrays on
the two larger buildings. These solar arrays will offset an estimated 70% of the restrooms’
electrical use.
The South and Central buildings will also include geothermal heat pumps as the primary heating
and cooling system for the building, the first such system the Port has built. These systems will
use approximately seven, 300-foot deep wells per building, to exchange heat pulled from the
ground to heat and cool the building spaces much like an air conditioner does with outside air.
The geothermal heat pumps are expected to handle over 70% of the buildings heating and
cooling needs without requiring outside fossil fuels.
Community Outreach
During the design phase, Port staff conducted extensive project outreach including 18 group
and individual meetings with moorage customers, tenants, liveaboards and dock captains.
Additional feedback was also collected via a number of surveys, and through a project email.
Staff responded to more than 110 individual emails submitted through this outreach email
account.
Small Business
The project team will coordinate with the Port’s small business group to maximize
opportunities for small business participation either as direct contracts or through subcontract
opportunities.
Schedule
The project consists of two phases: 1) Construction of the new buildings; 2) Demolition and
repurposing of existing structures. This schedule will allow for the continued use of the existing
facilities until the new buildings are available.
The current schedule for this project is:
Commission design authorization
September 2016
Design start
September 2016
Commission construction authorization
November 2017
Construction start
June 2018
In-use date
December 2018
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6d_Attach_A Page 4 of 6
Meeting Date: November 14, 2017
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
Cost Breakdown
This Request
Total Project
Design
$0
$1,600,000
Construction
$8,500,000
$8,500,000
Total
$8,500,000
$10,100,000
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED:
Alternative 1 – Continue to use the buildings in their current condition.
Cost Implications: Current buildings need interior refinishing to remain operational but would
still be below industry standard (~$500K for all buildings). Subsequent replacement costs
would be as shown in alternatives below, but adjusted upwards for inflation.
Pros:
(1) No capital funding required and leaves capital funds available for other projects.
Cons:
(1) Increased maintenance and emergency repair response costs over time.
(2) The risk of significant or catastrophic failure to roof systems, increasing over time, is
expected.
(3) Facilities remain out of compliance with ADA standards
(4) Keeping the restroom and laundry facilities in their current condition impacts the
attractiveness of the marina to current and potential customers. Customer surveys rank
worn restrooms and inadequate laundry facilities at the top of complaints
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 2 – Replace current restrooms with newer centralized facilities, but omit the North
restroom facility.
Cost Implications: $9,200,000 (total project)
Pros:
(1) Lower initial capital investment. This was the original site plan vision for the marina,
consolidating the new restroom facilities into two larger buildings. While design,
contract and construction management and installation costs are similar, construction
savings would be realized by reducing the overall scope.
(2) Provides additional laundry capacity and restroom capacity similar to the current
facilities.
Cons:
(1) Inconvenient access to the new facilities, especially for north end tenants. Customers
expressed a strong preference for facilities spread throughout the marina, rather than
having to walk further to more centralized facilities. Current restroom use data bears
this out with the great majority of each dock’s use being at the closest facility.
This is not the recommended alternative.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6d_Attach_A Page 5 of 6
Meeting Date: November 14, 2017
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
Alternative 3 – Replace current restrooms with newer centralized facilities, including the North
restroom facility.
Cost Implications: $10,100,000 (total project)
Pros:
(1) Renews the facility and completes the originally envisioned landside improvements
deferred in the marina waterside redevelopment in 2004. Provides improved facilities
with increased restroom, shower and laundry capacity. Addresses top issue of
customers by updating these facilities to industry standard levels.
Cons:
(1) More expensive than alternative 2 in initial capital outlay
This is the recommended alternative.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The previous estimate brought to Commission for consideration at design authorization
included the addition of a second floor to be used as leased office or retail space. Upon further
investigation this was shown to be not financially viable and this alternative has not been
pursued in the current design, nor is it reflected in the current estimate.
Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary
Capital
Expense
Total
COST ESTIMATE
Previous estimate
$12,000,000
$0
$12,000,000
Current change
-$1,900,000
0
-$1,900,000
Revised estimate
$10,100,000
0
$10,100,000
AUTHORIZATION
Previous authorizations
$1,600,000
0
$1,600,000
Current request for authorization
$8,500,000
0
$8,500,000
Total authorizations, including this request
$10,100,000
0
$10,100,000
Remaining amount to be authorized
$0
$0
$0
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds
This project was included in the 2017 Plan of Finance under CIP #C800356 SBM
Restrooms/Service Buildings Repair with a total cost of $7,622,000. The additional $2,478,000
required to fund this project is available under CIP #C800002 MD: Contingency Renewal and
Replacement.
The increase in estimate is due to the additional costs to redesign the building without the
second floors, inclusion of solar and geothermal system costs but primarily due to increasing
prices in the Seattle construction market.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6d_Attach_A Page 6 of 6
Meeting Date: November 14, 2017
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
The project will be funded by the General Fund.
Financial Analysis and Summary
Project cost for analysis
$ 12,000,000
Business Unit (BU)
Recreational Boating
Effect on business performance
(NOI after depreciation)
This project will support/maintain current moorage
revenue at SBM. Incremental depreciation expense from
this project is estimated at $400,000 per year, based on a
30-year asset life. NOI after Depreciation will decrease
by the associated depreciation from this project.
IRR/NPV (if relevant)
The NPV is present value of the project cost
CPE Impact
N/A
Future Revenues and Expenses (Total cost of ownership)
No future revenues are anticipated as a result of this project.
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS
September 27, 2016 – The Commission authorized additional design funding request.
January 6, 2015 – The Commission authorized the Design request.
September 30, 2014 - Design Authorization request - Tabled
